Interval Estimations of Building Heating Energy Consumption using the Degree-Day Method and Fuzzy Numbers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to propagate the input uncertainties of the degree-day method to estimate the building heating energy consumption as numerical intervals. While it is common to use average or expected values (e.g., Typical Meteorological Year) to address the input uncertainties, this practice can only yield the best estimates as single-point values without informing the possible range of variations. After classifying two types of uncertainty as weather variability and imprecision in the degree-day method, this paper proposes the adoption of fuzzy numbers and their arithmetic as the theoretical approach to handle uncertainty. As the degree-day method mainly involves elementary arithmetic (e.g., addition and multiplication), fuzzy number arithmetic can be directly applied to formally process numerical intervals. The proposed method is demonstrated and verified via a building example in Canada, and the interval results are comparable to the variation of heating energy consumption based on the data of outdoor ambient temperatures in 52 years.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it